tv Philippe Reines on Clinton Campaign CSPAN January 6, 2018 9:16pm-10:13pm EST
hendrick take meyer with his book. inhe finds himself opposition when fdr is elected and democrats take the majority in the senate. he's in opposition for the next dozen years and that means to get anything done, which often meant resisting some of franklin roosevelt's initiatives, there needed to be a coalition. he needed to reach across the aisle. >> q and a on c-span at 8:00 a.m. on sunday. phillipe reines talks about the+ 2016 election.
this is just under an hour. right. friends, we are reconvening. we have a speaker. time to get going. before i introduce our speaker, just a quick reminder we are going to be on television. when you have a question please go up to the q and a mic. please is a you name, school, and keep your question concise. it is my distinct pleasure to reiner hephillipe joined hillary clinton when she became secretary of state in 20,009 -- 2009. he has worked for a number of political campaigns and holds a
bachelor of arts degree in political science from colombia university. here is we have an example of what you can do with a political science bachelor's degree. i'm going to hand over the microphone to him and not take any more of his time and i'm looking forward to a great presentation. [applause] >> good morning. thank you for having me. .hank you, julia i didn't know this was on tv anymore than you did until a few minutes ago. i just want to say if you things up front quickly and get right to hearing from you guys. and if there's anything i want to add, maybe save a couple of minutes. first off, i want to give you some context on who you are hearing from and give you a few warnings. up until 8:00 p.m. on election
, i couldt november 8 not fathom the idea of hillary clinton not being the president of the united states. i was as wrong as anyone. 1 things a started to make a little sense. i'm going to speak from that perspective of having 2020 hindsight. two is i'm going to reference history and polling a lot. the problem with doing that this a and age people can say polling was wrong. i think at this point to not have any conversation about polling we are seeing now or more importantly history, yes, history was upended last year, but history was upended in 2008. that doesn't mean it has no bearing. part of that is i'll probably be
a little annoying can you imagine if this happened if hillary clinton was president or can you imagine if this happened when president obama was president. i try to do it next to last, but i think it's important because to me the greatest threat right now is the normalization of what is happening. there is a term that i read -- i don't know who to credit it to -- malignant normalcy. that's a big part of what is happening and a scourge i think that needs to be stopped. i will say the greatest perpetrator of that is donald .rump i will just end by saying i think there's no more important thing to do then get donald trump out of office as fast as possible. that's where i'm coming from. these don't hesitate to .hallenge me
it's not like i'll snap back at you or something. and most importantly, i'm going to be negative about things that's negative, but don't leave here dissuaded or demoralized personally -- i have worked for hillary clinton since july 2002, 15.5 years. and she is one of the most loved -- beloved polarizing people in america. and i think people assume that because i work for her and i'm a democrat that my views are lefty, liberal, and they are often not. the point i'm try to make is that i've actually never felt as ofh of a democrat or as much an american as i have since mass -- since last november. lot of what i believe has to
happen is coming from that perspective, of the damage being done to our country, not just what is evident short-term, but what will probably last for .ecades so, that uplifting opening, kevin, did you want to -- or should i just open it up? >> [indiscernible] if you would like to start with a comment or question, please come to the mic. instructedw julia you to say who you are, where you're from -- >> and school, too. yet? u in jersey city, new jersey and my question is looking back on the election, do you think hillary clinton did in
adequate job of campaigning because there was a lot of criticism about how she faltered. phillipe: that's often asked in the form of not going to wisconsin, not going to blue states she didn't win and i understand that. i think a couple of things, when people ask about wisconsin, withs a combat package michigan and pennsylvania. i hate to say it and not to talk down to the cheese state, she lost by more than the margin of wisconsin. that's not an excuse, but the reason i say to look at the three some is you can't make that argument about pennsylvania. the lady practically moved to pennsylvania. no one didn't take pennsylvania
seriously including the other arms of the democratic party. if you look back to i think april, may, maybe a little later i thinkyou had ,riorities usa, one of the pacs they immediately identified pennsylvania as a must win. the campaign itself put tens of millions of dollars. the campaign pulled regularly, regularly.ups polled it is hard to -- i understand the wisconsin points and i don't know, maybe if she had spent as much time in wisconsin as she did pennsylvania, she would have -- she would have wisconsin.
i understand the point, but one thing i know that you know we will hopefully get to it if somebody asked about conspiracy theories, but one of the most ridiculous things is painting hillary clinton ads -- as anything other than energetic and spry. it is hard to keep up with her and she campaigned her tail off. she won in places like nevada that were not gimme's. in hindsight, that's the -- to me if you don't solve pennsylvania, you don't solve the whole thing. >> think you very much. hi, my name is rachel ackerman and i'm with the harvard extension school. speaking of york hindsight that began at 8:01 p.m., what would you have done differently about campaigning? >> about harvard extension,
don't forget they give you four credits per course, if you transferred don't forget you get four. >> i don't plan on transferring. >> in hindsight i think you have to break it down to the larger strategic question of going back 2015, when she decided to run and what that would like like -- would look like and tactical decisions in 2016. and then this third bucket of external factors. in no particular order if there's something i could have done differently i would've waited outside jim commie's car before his infamous press conference and tackled him until someone with some sense could
say this is very inappropriate what you're about to do. strategically, i don't know. i think in hindsight there was some very big problems that would have affected any democrat. i'm also going to be -- let me state up front -- i don't think any democrat would have beaten donald trump aside from president obama. i will come back to that, but i think that because if you look again at polling i think one out votersy five said they voted for donald trump, voted for barack obama in 2012 and continued to approve of the job that barack obama was doing last year. >> that is pretty interesting. it has been hard for people to grasp that. the reason that's important is
if you replaced hillary clinton runs,oe biden -- if he best to knocking donald trump out, metaphorically. he would have been bogged down by a obama care. he would have been bogged down by trade, he would have been bogged down by being in washington for decades, and those things alone were probably dispositive. and i think the other point is everyone assumes -- you know when they say x would have one, they assume that x would have gotten what hillary clinton got and added some. i think that is a silly way to look at it.
other people would not have gotten what she got either with specific demographics or subgroups. i think this strategic question is hard to answer. it was just such a lunacy. had -- saying you're going to face donald trump, he's going to be accused of sexual assault and harassment, nobody is going to care he went bankrupt six times. he will say he could shoot someone and not lose, i would be laughed out of the room. she became the first woman candidate of a major political party. on the technical side we had .ome errors she writes about it in her book called "what happened."
she is not going anywhere. people have wanted her voice to leave for decades and thankfully she has never there were comments she made about coal workers that were taken differently than she meant. lose by 70,000 votes, you can sit here and list 10 things that made the difference. if i could snap my fingers, it commiee july 5, when jim
went to the comey -- when jim comey went to the podium. he added 15 minutes of you think that made that she was al capone. people who hate hillary clinton have said that. he up sensibly was fired by donald trump because of that. obviously that is not believable, but we had to live with that. in october, doubled down on that. i'm not sure if that covers -- >> i'm sure it answers some other questions. ani'm not used to having
hour. chase, you were tasked with portraying donald trump and the mock debate with hillary to practice, in what ways have you seen the change the between the candidate donald trump and the president donald trump and what are the implications of those changes? >> i have seen none. the only changes have been the effect. trump -- thereld were three general election debates between the candidates. it is a big deal. it is one of the few times you see the candidates together. secretary clinton took them very seriously. someone had said i had been training my whole life to become donald trump just did not know it.
[laughter] it was a real window into things. first and foremost, it is remarkable to go through life never suffering consequences. never once. goes out of business, declares bankruptcy, more people come along and lent to him. no organization has declared bankruptcy more often than trump casinos. group.ly every there was not a demographic in this room that was not offended by donald trump. -- coupled very well that with lying like no one has lied he for and not getting called out on it were just being
desensitized. it worked. when people say how did she lose to him? i say that remembers 17 republicans lost to him. i did not care for a bunch of them, but a lot of them were seasoned politicians who served in public office who had a lot of money and who were not idiots. he steamrolled them. the primaries were not close. he barely lost iowa and never looked back. a lot of why election day was a shock was because people thought that routine would not work to a .roader audience you could dominate the republican party with 50% of whoever these people are, but when the rubber hits the road -- but he didn't.
there were no consequences to anything he said or did. now, there are still no .onsequences as did youne success win the presidency, he was successful. what he did was shocking. it is understandable in hindsight. it was remarkable. what he has done since has not worked out. it has not. win.eform was their first it is because it is the thing the republican party joins hands about most. so his style is not translated -- or it is and we will find out not,ard way -- but he is for someone who wants to be know how he looks
at the piece of paper. if i looked out and said 32% of america approves of me and 70% thinks i should be investigated for this or 60% can think of a nice thing to say about me, i would maybe do something different. he does not need to become a nice guy. he just should dial some stuff down. he has no plan. he has never had a plan. was aalogy i used once pinball machine. he is not the guy standing here doing this. ball.the he is hitting random bumpers and the lights are going off and the sounds are going off. he has no plan. if you say it out loud, his new plan is to support you. ou.is to twart y
he has not changed. he is incapable of changing. why would he change? things have never gone wrong for him. he is the president of the united states. he is one of 44 people to hold that office. that is why he yells at his staff all this time. you don't know what you're talking about. be standing at the podium in 10 years saying that is how we won two terms. i hope not. but he is not going to change. -- the real people who are naive or overly hopeful is to wait for the pivot. when will he stop tweeting like a crazy person? -- how know how many much time has to go by before you accept the fact that he is
not going to change. this is where we are. this is what will continue. when i was learned studying my own prep for debate -- he is the most predictable unpredictable person of all time. that is why i don't understand why people are surprised. so the overly long answer to your question is no. >> thank you. [applause] >> high. somethingering about you mentioned in your introduction. somethingthe election inside of you changed. -- what isyou to
something you do differently now? the tax package was wrong. we have never passed tax cuts at a time of economic growth in our countries history. there is usually a reason to cut taxes. it is transparent what he is doing. i am not going to the mat. my head is not exploding because he passed tax cuts. to me, the worst moment of this on it awhat changed --8:01 was that he made it ok to say whatever you wanted. most of the time it is flat out dumb. he was unleashing a hate that
was not going to dissipate. of his there is a combo giving everyone a get out of cardical correctness jail -- the most angering moment for me was his speech to the boy scouts. to justify that and say it is ok. i went back and looked at president's all the way back at least to nixon, addressing the jamboree. what he said is crazy. it is crazy. i think what he is doing with the constant take news --fake
, is and disparaging people don't have kids. there are times i wish i did. what he is doing to an entire generation of children is horrific. you hear stories about kids coming home and their parents c. ng what is with this they say it is a fake report card. over time,will see that these numbers have exploded. he could leave office tomorrow and we will be dealing with this for generations. in terms of that kind of thing and that is what kills me. if he wants to wake up every day and focus on tax cuts or infrastructure, i would disagree with him. i would not be screaming from the rooftops. attacking constant every single part of society and
he is testing it. and it until it breaks -- he does not care about breaking it. system.apping the -- he is swamping the system. >> thank you. i am interested in the direction of the democratic party with trumps election. i am wondering will the democratic party perhaps revisit the message they were trying to deliver during the 2016 election or will they try other strategies to get the base they lost? >> that's a great question. it is a big debate. i don't know the answer. you have this in two sections. whichve the 2018 midterms
is shaping up to beat the ballgame. thatu can flip the house, is really going to make a difference in terms of slowing him down. depending on what the mueller investigation finds, taking steps. the second basket is 2020. i think you have many people in the party now saying impeach, impeach, impeach. the minute we get control. because he is committing high crimes and misdemeanors. he has met the threshold of being impeached. not to mention, the 25th amendment which people who lose their minds should not be president of the united states. i don't know the answer to that. i do know, and here is a good example, history tells us 2018 will be ugly for him. , itas ugly for barack obama
was ugly for bill clinton. in 2006 it was ugly for george bush. each of those things to me had a reason. bill clinton, it was failure of health care and the budget deal. with barack obama, it was obamacare. with george bush it was iraq. i don't know -- this is the question you're asking -- whether just sheer hatred in the democratic party for this man is of republicans getting worked up about obamacare or bill clinton or democrats and iraq. i think it is. on the flip side, you have people saying -- including nancy pelosi -- that is not our
message. you have people like tom st isr who is very wealthy and involved in politics for environmental policy. he has taken it on himself to .un the group need to impeach i agree with that. i think the man has met the threshold. i don't know. i think, if it were held tomorrow, it would be a bloodbath. the biggest indicator of that, which has been noticed is how many republicans are not running. -- and ik goes by when just don't mean junior members, but committee members. they are saying, i think it is time to retire.
it is over two dozen. then you get to 2020. let's assume he is still in office. let's assume he hasn't lost his -- i thinke then he it is going to be a bit of a circus and the democratic party. we could all name 30 people who might run and not just a lot of people but new types of people. businessmen, the whether it is howard schultz or mark zuckerberg, you will have celebrities, i don't know who? the rock.
he has my vote as of now. that's a good point. i am not sure who else -- what it will take to beat him. a celebritye category, then you have an incredibly large typical category of governors, senators, and house numbers. .- house members that.k they will cut -- there are multiple problems. a lot of people with money have not run for president because they are not willing to spend a billion dollars to lose. mike bloomberg is a good example of that. what donald trump did is he one with $60 million out of his own pocket. has $60 million a
pocket change, you should run. but there are a lot of people out there that $60 million is pocket change. that will increase. the biggest thing to me is, do people think they can out trump donald trump? he did not change the rules. he did not abide by them. if someone says, i will run and i will say i can shoot people on i can have nine affairs and go out of business and say incredibly stupid and hurtful things since that is the new world we live in, they will lose. flipside, i don't know how not doing that -- he has not changed the playing field. he has just been a unique person who just skates through life.
. hope this all corrects itself i don't know if it will correct itself in that form. you joke about the rock, but it might take someone who is bigger than life. it is hard imagining a governor or member of the senate -- he will just say you are a product of the swamp. you just vote. you don't do anything. i am the one who fixed everything. you are threatened by the success. on 2018 and harish on 2020 here it. -- i am bullish on 2018. i am bearish on 2020. , peopleast month or two
have been less angry than they were in 2016. i don't know if it is because russia did not work them up or they were just so happy they could run around saying and doing whatever they wanted. the imbalance between passion on the democratic side and some steadiness on the republican side is a good fight. i worry about the fight of anger first his anger. i don't think democrats are very anger intonslating something because we do not resort to the same tactics. if i had to pick between the two, i would run to ground what happened with russia and run on
that. >> thank you. i am a film major. hillary clinton has been described before as a good leader, but a bad candidate. what do you believe should be done in a system that prefers candidates that know how to speak to a crowd as opposed to candidates that display leadership qualities. ? there aren't many presidents walking the earth. she is one of them. it is hard for me to think she is not a good candidate because i think that is the way -- i understand your question, but it is said that that is not considered the best way.
youone thing i would add is mentioned speaking cyano or -- speaking style or speeches. the bit about her yelling is, it is a pretty clear window into how male and female candidates are treated differently. inspiring. obama was if bill clinton was loud, she passionate.s if hillary clinton was loud, she was grating. i don't know what style campaigning will work. it is possible to style campaigning is not only problematic for the hillary clinton's of the world, but for everyone. he steamrolled through the entire republican party. -- sometimes i say
this is a bad analogy, but jack kennedy was more of a politician bobbyeople realize and kennedy was more of a substance person than people realize and i think that goes for bill and hillary clinton. the notion that he is the smart politician of the family. she understands people. she understands what is going on. i don't know how many of you have met her, the single thing -- the two things you hear most after people meet her is she is nothing what you thought, which is what i thought when i interviewed with her. and she is much more beautiful in person than on tv. she always said that is not a
compliment. [laughter] i don't know. i don't know if elizabeth warren runs, whether her passion is considered passion or a woman being louder than they should. >> thank you. >> good morning. my name is andrew. the question was asked earlier about how you had the job of being donald trump in prep for the debates. what were some of the tactics and ways that you used to get inside the secretaries had so to speak, or what you employed? >> so it was sort of scary. [laughter] it's a window. we are all seeing it now. there are two parts to that. there the marching orders i was
given, and there was what i saw. the marching orders i was given -- the people who lead the had done this multiple times. they have done it for president obama both elections. they are the best out there. it is remarkable. ron is a once in a generation superstar. guidance was interesting. --it is a misnomer that he does not have policy. it might be wrong. it might be weird. he has it. it is just scattered. tv might have someone on saying something that is effectively policy.
so you have to note that. relishes hitting his opponents. , to what everend extent he spends time practicing debates, it tends to be on that side which is not surprising given what we know about how he approaches interpersonal relationships. part, what i doesn't -- that he on the opposition side he does -- he exaggerates horribly. kasich byttack john saying you have a $2 billion deficit in ohio. and now it ised
-- that is an exaggeration. 006, hio did have a million dollar. but trump just one. he would lie or eight them or -- lie or bait them but stay within a couple iterations of the truth. that made it more effective. debates. the i watched the primaries three times over. once justnormally, his interactions, and once with the sound off. he is not a good debater. the moments that people think he did well like calling jeb low
energy, he only resorts to that when he is incredibly frustrated by that person. there was no one who got under his skin more than jeb bush. when he got to the low energy part or making fun of his wife or whatever it was, it was after an exchange of five minutes where he is turning red and cannot handle. he snaps. he -- you could see it. was next to him because of polling. he was the only one taller than him. in the back of his mind, he feared bush because he had the money and he was the establishment. if he was going to lose it would be to bush. go.it is a scary place to
you can do what you want and say what you want. , easy the hardest assignment i ever had. again, he is very predictable. he is the most predictable unpredictable person. it is hard to get that out of my head. morning, thank you for being with us this morning. i come from the harvard extension. questionsad a few already about 2020. is it possible for a modern democrat to be somehow made appealing to a jacksonian american. what that include a democratic campaign?social media >> it is a great question.
i want to unpack that a little bit. the social media part is a great example. it had a huge impact and still has a huge impact particularly this twitter feed because he is, you know, as much as it drives most people crazy and, to be honest with you, what is interesting is that please 70% of all americans including republicans say they wish he'd top. so there is something everyone is recognizing as embarrassing. he continues as he did during the campaign, he is just giving talking points straight to his people which is really smart. yes, 2020 a democrat has to be sh rude about social media but is a democrat going to lie via twitter and are they going to get away it? does the media say donald trump changed the rules so now everybody can lie?
you'll have some poor candidate who says i'm going to do it his way and they'll get swamped. then you get into the larger problem, the example i like to fake news which i wish everyone would start calling full news. if you buy into the whole thing of fake news, his side, his people, you're being taken as a fool. i mean, you have used that as the simplestt form of onversation in a pathetic way. i just wanted to get that off my chest. look at one of the examples of something thrown out last year. so there was, you know, something going around on facebook. god knows what else. and let's forget about for a moment where it started. that the pope endorsed donald
trump. ok. let's set aside the hilarity of that because the only presidential candidate in human history that ever attacked the pope was donald trump and even more so the only person to be attacked back by a pope. now it was very effective. you have people who bought it, didn't challenge it. they were taken as a fool. and they believe it. nd they say, oh, i'm catholic. catholic, you know, the head of catholic religion is saying vote for donald trump. now, what is a democrat supposed to do about it? what were we supposed to do about that last year? were we supposed to send out a of "the washington post" or fact check.org saying in seven paragraphs this is what donald trump said about the pope and this is the truth
and push it out via twitter and facebook? that wouldn't have worked. should we have sent out something that said the pope has announced anyone who votes for donald trump is going to a specific place in hell? [laughter] >> and god told him that? might have worked better but we would never do that. again, the tactics in balance is a real problem. the fascination with a conspiracy theory is i just, i can't understand it. you know, i guess a trump supporter would say, believing in russia collusion is a conspiracy theory. so that's one if you want to give him -- spot them one. >> the form of pizza recipes, they believe democratic
national committee staffers were murdered. they believe hillary clinton is concealing some kind of crazy illness. i mean, it goes on and on. and the means of how you fight that whether social media or tv ad or speech, it doesn't matter. i don't -- so in terms of, you don't need to win a hundred percent of the electorate. so if this, you know, thankfully his 40% had become 32% or so, that gap, the people who voted for him that are disappointed in him, who i don't know on earth what these people thought they were getting, but i don't know what kind of person appeals to them. i mean, what is really remarkable is look at the electoral maps going back to, you know, reagan. 1984. won 49 states in
nixon won 49 states in 1972. if you look at bill clinton's 1992 and 1996 it's crazy. south voter, north voter, louisiana, and since gore-bush it's been a 50/50 country. i don't know, i mean it might be as simple as just taking back michigan, wisconsin, pennsylvania. restoring the so-called blue wall. who does that? do they have to be a populist? i don't know that donald trump can out -- be out donald trumped. and the democratic primary, i think, is going to be very similar to that mid term in that in 2007 presidential primaries there was zero tolerance for anyone who
supported iraq in any way. if you voted years after we provide funding for the troops, there was zero tolerance for that. i understand that. if you apply the same sort of litmus test, are replace iraq 2019, and trump, in t's whose the most angry democrat, i don't know that is going to translate well in 2020. you might have a populist democrat who is really liberal. so i was stalling to say i on't know. >> my name is rachel craig a graduate student at suffolk niversity in boston.
so a large amount of millennial support but didn't have a lot of turnout and there was low enthusiasm so my question is do you think there is anything specific that the democrats can do to get democrat -- get millennials actually out to the polls and voting for them? >> well, i need another hour to make fun of millennials. i would like tongue that they wake up and realize that not voting was not a good idea or writing in what's her face -- either gary johnson or jill stein was not a good idea. if you look at a lot of these states it's even 20% of the stein and johnson voters had shifted. h.r.c. would have won. if eople who protested --
someone protested h.r.c. because bernie sanders touted free college and shea lived on planet earth and said, that's a problem, but i'm going to get you 99% there, i don't know what that millennial got out of 2016. donald trump is not giving anyone frea tuition. he's taking away stuff from teachers and education. he's put probably some unqualified person, top secretary of the department of education. but i don't know how mellan yals think. i don't know. it's unclear what will get millennials going. and, you know, someone like sanders or warren seemed to tap into that, but not if you can't do it at the expense of whack them all. it goes back to what i was saying you can't just assume people last year would have got what hillary clinton got and added on to it.
it is not like that was some sort of bed rook. she worked for it. she spent a billion dollars on it. so it is not a gimme. but i think millennials have to -- they have to -- they more than anyone have to say this is not normal. and there's a lot of pressure to shut up. you know, donald trump and his people want everyone to shut up, get over the election. hillary clinton go away. that's in their best interest. but that's not how it works. we're supposed to oppose what we disagree with. and i hope millennials don't fall into a lull of accepting . is is what it is god knows how many will see their taxes go down and base it just on that. but, yeah. they are a key demographic that
voted oddly in 2016 that i'm not sure people understand how to get them to vote, you know, roductively. >> thank you. >> all right. we are out of time. on behalf of the washington center -- >> oh, yes. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. how is it -- i'm amazed that in an hour no one asked about russia. that is interesting. is it because everyone just realizes that it is such a mess, i don't know if everyone noticed this morning steve bannon is quoted in a new book coming out saying that don jr. and crew taking this meeting in trump tower was trees anonymous
-- treasonous. i'm glad you've already set your minds and seen enough evidence on that that you didn't have any questions. thank you again for having me. it was a lot of fun. [applause] >> on newsmakers maryland senator chris van holland who chairs the democratic senatorial campaign committee talks about the possibility of democrats winning back a senate majority. newsmakers sunday at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern on -span. >> for nearly 20 years in depth on book tv has featured the nation's best known nonfiction writers for live conversations about their work. this year as a special project, we're featuring best selling fiction writers for a monthly
program. in depth fiction edition. join us for our first program sunday at noon eastern with david ignatious, the author of several national security thrillers including agents of innocence, body of lies, blood money, and his most recent the quantum spy. our special series in depth fiction edition with author david ignatious sunday, live from noon to 3:00 p.m. eastern on book tv on spoint. that's on spoint -- c-span 2. >> now the discussion on the history and impact of the pentagon papers from washington journal. this is half an hour. continues. joining us from new york city is david rudenstine, a professor of law at the core does a school of law -- core does that -- or does out -- cordozo school of l